It is not about being republican or being a supporter of Ann Coulter. It is also not about any particular ideology. The poll is biased simply from a statistical point of view. One major bias of this study is called 'selection bias' as explained before and noted in the article itself. Furthermore some of the presented data in regards to republicans is very weak since this subgroup is very small (total of 14). It is not clearly defined who was included in the poll either, neither do we get any other information about the respondents. Who are those 'research associates' ? Despite all these flaws the data has been used and reproduced in blogs and media to support the democratic campaign. By the way, based on the given data around 10% of the 'democratic research associates' do support McCain's economic plans. Why was that no mentioned in the article ?

Given that the Economist noted a high percentage of Democrats and therefore a likely reason for the high Democratic bias, anyone complaining should be equally as forthcoming as this newspaper in admitting their bias. No?

My high esteem for The Economist just dropped a few notches. You are starting to sound like the New York Times or MSNBC. I have always liked your publication for its objective and insightful news, and interesting and pithy editorials, but you lost it with this one. If you publish a poll of economists that is composed of a strong majority of self described democrats, you are guaranteed to get a biased result. You should not publish biased opinion as news. If you want to write an editorial about it, then great as long as you state it as such, but it is not objective news.

It always cracks me up when so-called "conservatives" call bias when things go against their ideology. Isn't this the same group of people who claim some things are just right and some things are just wrong? This is one of those cases where things are right and wrong. Obama's policy is right and McCain's policy is wrong. It's that simple.

As long as Republicans think that governing is all about Taxcuts, Deregulation, and Invasions our country will continue to suffer the consequences. As this poll of economists shows - Republicans are in serious need of an upgraded and more inclusive worldview. Perhaps some of these economists have a few good ideas for them.

An interesting chart, however:1. The American people are not academic economists. Economists are social scientists that study and try to elucidate past behavior. This pole remind me of asking paleontologists if an hospital patient will survive. Today, we need surgeons!2. My German microeconomics university professor strongly advised: "Never let economists run the government!"But, thanks the same for your work.

But of course there will be lots of comments about how this is not a fair article, how this survey doesn't mean anything, how economists are all communists, how the media always picks on McCain, and how Bush is the greatest president ever, etc. But we all know that Republicans like to stick their heads in the sand and refuse to let facts interfere with their ideology, and they certainly won't surprise us here.

For all of those continuing to leave this article with issues concerning "bias" -- "The Economist should take a hint from Ann Coulter or Fox," they might be thinking... Take this quote from Lexington, and think about the other component affecting this polls outcome, aside from academia being "liberal:" "there is nothing about the political cycle that dictates that an outgoing president should have an approval rating of 27% and an army of enemies on Capitol Hill. Bill Clinton ended his two terms with ratings of close to 70%"

Let's be honest with ourselves on this accord. McCain has stated nothing contrasting him politically with George W. Bush, a man who is among the worst US Presidents ever. As such, when faced with McCain's positions for quality, one only needs to look at today's performance. Apparently, the election of McCain will leave us rather Bear-ish about the US's economic outlook.

The survey seems weighted infavor of my Candidate--Obama. Not once in any approach to the mess we are in have I seen any mention of exerting control over lobbyists. These people are the main reason for the tragedy we face today.

Taking a step back (while this poll, as the Economist graciously concedes on the front-end is not scientific), we are left with one truth: economists, like Americans, trust Democrats over Republicans with their economy. To argue bias from the Economist on this is absurd sore-loser positioning. It is classic AM radio conservatism arguing bias in the face of bad results on their behalf. Shocking, what’s amazing is right now, so called “conservatives,” aren’t calling the economy itself “biased.” The Republican Party’s eight years of ineptitude will hopefully lose it this election, so our world does not have to worry about food on our tables.

This is identical to something Scott Adams (Dilbert author) published on his blog. He conducted an unscientific survey of economists and found, to his professed great surprise, that the responding economists were overwhelmingly self-described democrats. Self-described republicans are evidently quite rare in ecomomic circles, with "unaffiliated" much more common too. It would seem that two, unscientific polls of economists have confirmed eachother and refuted the myth that economists are naturally conservative leaning.

I'm surprised the esteemed Economist actually published these results. It isn't scientific. In fact, it isn't research in any bona fide sense of the term. Given the dismal response rate, the enormous slant (of particular note in light of the generally conservative leanings of economists -- micro, that is), and the illumination of the reported 500 economists already backing McCain's policies, why go forward with it at all? It seems the answer can only be that it was published to merely justify to the respondants that their participation was not in vain. Otherwise, it looks rather meaningless.

This is a very biased polling and the way that is presented is very disappointing. A total of 142 responded out of 683. Only 14 respondents were Republicans. 3 of which favored McCain versus 6 that favored Obama. This data is statistically very susceptible to bias. For instance if only three more respondents out of the 541 non-respondents had responded in favor of McCain the percentages would have been already even. Also the author did not give the number of democrats that favored McCain, an important number ! The conclusion of this biased polling can only be: economic research associates that are willing to respond to a polling by the economist are more likely democrats and favor Obama's economic plans. A unknown but significant number of democrats among these economists still prefer McCain.

First some comments are really "Wow..." can't believe that some people live at least a few decades back.Second, the poll is kinda controversial or at least for me. Can't believe that majority of economist voted that electing the new president obvious Obama, will have such a influence on economic situation.thx and please comment

So class, we've learned something new from Chips today:Communists create bubbles so they can gain extra-Constitutional powers. Communists apparently love to "overreach" and "manipulate". I'm guessing they also love to nationalize large banks, insurance outfits, and companies.Given those facts, it seems the highest irony that Communism was ushered into the US by a Republican administration. Ike would be so proud.I guess if you really hate Communists, you know which party not to vote for in Nov.